386 Unix (In)compatibilities Summary

[Richard A. O'Keefe]

In article <819 at vsi.UUCP> sullivan at vsi.UUCP (Michael T Sullivan) writes:
>In article <429 at uport.UUCP>, plocher at uport.UUCP (John Plocher) writes:
>> uPort vs. 386/ix compatiblity is there by DESIGN.

>I don't think the fact that both of your OS's are based on the same code
>is enough to call it an ABI, or even say the compatibility is there by
>design.

It is definitely the case that the compatibility is there by design.
We sell a tool that now runs on 386s, and it was important to us that
there was *ONE* V.3 for the 386.  (Of course, we also have to deal with
Dynix on Sequents and SunOS on RoadRunners, but BSD takes the pain out...)
Intel were closely involved in the 386 port of V.3, and were *very*
interested that applications developed on Brand X machines should run
on Brand Y machines.